User talk:ESkog/Archive1D
Requesting your advise regarding the new template[edit]
Greetings, ESkog
I need your advice regarding a new Copyright template I am creating.
As you perhaps know, recently Wikipedia has changed policy and allows 3rd party images with licenses compatible with "Attribution, Share-alike, no derivative work" scheme to be uploaded and used in articles. For a long time now, Microsoft screen shots were only used whenever they qualified Fair-Use. However, with this new change, they no longer qualify for Fair-Use, as Microsoft has already authorized the use of its product screen shots under much less restrictive licensing terms. Microsoft licensing scheme allows virtually any resolution and does not mandate a no-other-alternative check.
So, as I'm currently working on a re-write for Windows Media Player article and I need screen shots, I decided to create a new template for Microsoft product screen shots to accommodate the Microsoft's licensing demands: User:FleetCommand/Template:Microsoft_screenshot.
However, I feel I need the advice of a Wikipedia expert on the subject for this template, and you are one of the few that I could think of. Please visit the new template's draft and provide feedback. Any advice is highly appreciated.
Thanks in advance.
Regards,
Fleet Command (talk) 21:33, 16 June 2009 (UTC)
- My opinion would be that the rules Microsoft outlines are too restrictive for a free license, and we'd still need to use these per the non-free content policy. In particular:
- Microsoft's point #3 limits the use of the image in commercial contexts, which is not compatible with the GFDL.
- Microsoft's point #4 limits the modification of the image, which is not compatible with either Wikipedia license (GFDL and Creative Commons).
- Microsoft's point #6 also limits the modification of the image.
- I think this is a great move on Microsoft's part, but it's not quite enough for us to use the images all over Wikipedia. If you want more opinions from folks who know this kind of stuff, you might ask at Wikipedia talk:Non-free content. (ESkog)(Talk) 13:34, 17 June 2009 (UTC)
- You are quite right: Microsoft licensing scheme for its screenshots is not meant to make them free for all uses at all. It is simply the same as Wikipedia Fair-use, only with resolution and no-other alternative demands removed. However, the image to which this template is affixed still requires non-free image data and non-free use rationale. Basicall, Microsoft statement has merely soldified the originally vague fair-use terms, just as Wikipedia did.
- So, what do advise? Should I cease working on it? Or should I use it as an alternative to {{non-free software screenshot}}? If you agree with the latter, would this use be merely informative or would this template remove the low resolution mandate and no-other-alternative check?
- Fleet Command (talk) 09:38, 18 June 2009 (UTC)
Regarding my uploaded images[edit]
Hello, This is regarding the image files I uploaded :
I have already forwarded the mails sent to me by the administrators of daivajna.org and kalikadevikasarpal.com to permissions-en@wikimedia.org,last Saturday and even today. Gautamgoa1984 (talk) 04:58, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Hello[edit]
Do you want me to forward those mails again?
Gautamgoa1984 (talk) 05:05, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
Deletion of File:Let's get crazy live.jpg[edit]
The image, File:Let's get crazy live.jpg is of her when she premiered the song. It's not part of a tour and the video will air on Disney Channel soon. Plus, its taping will be included in a Japaneze edition of Hannah Montana 3 and in the American edition the CD will unlock special access to it. And in Hannah Montana's third season, it was and is to be featured. That's what special and should not be deleted. --Ipodnano05 (talk) 15:44, 20 June 2009 (UTC)
Leetch.jpg[edit]
Okay I will not reupload it as it is not free use.--Something12356789 (talk) 21:54, 23 June 2009 (UTC)
Request for mediation not accepted[edit]
|
A Request for Mediation to which you were are a party was not accepted and has been delisted. You can find more information on the case subpage, Wikipedia:Requests for mediation/Use of Sports Logos.
|
If you have questions about this bot, please contact the Mediation Committee directly.
Deletion of Image Banners on My User Page[edit]
Hi, you just deleted two of my images from my page without explination, I do own the © to both images. ZellDenver (talk) 04:52, 26 June 2009 (UTC)
I released them under that paticular license to prevent plagerism, but I will revise this.
Thanks[edit]
Thanks for the heads up on image usage there's so many wdiki rules and I'm just starting to understand them.--ChubsterII (talk) 00:45, 2 July 2009 (UTC)
CSFanExpo.jpg[edit]
File has been permitted for use by owner, awaiting email shortly to be sent to permissions-en@wikimedia.org. Seeamus (talk) 06:12, 13 July 2009 (UTC)
NCDOCMAP.jpg[edit]
You have requested the file: NCDOCMAP.jpg be deleted. I made the file. It is not from another website I made it. I am removing the tag & I will try and find more information to add to the licensing, and but since they're no discussion form, I feel that the Tag is not appropriate. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Chad01 (talk • contribs) 22:20, 14 July 2009 (UTC)
Help Adding Images[edit]
I've edited quite a few pages for minor errors, style, and general content, but I've never added an image of any sort before. You flagged a couple of images I put up for the Houston mayoral election, 2009. Did I fix them properly? --Nogburt (talk) 07:52, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
image[edit]
Listern you left me a message on my page about an error with the image. Great, I got it, I'll fix the problem. But DO NOT come back on MY Talk page and revert my edits after I have removed it. I have erase whatever message I want tp erase from my talk page Bottracker (talk) 16:45, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Sorry, My mistake I thought you were another editor who has been annoying me and sending me senseless messages lately. Anyway thanks for the heads up Bottracker (talk) 16:50, 16 July 2009 (UTC)
Brandon Lemuel[edit]
Dear ESkog
Look I did this based on a great man who has helped a lot of persons, plus he is a C.C.W.P.(if you do not now what it is look for it on google) and there are only 100 of them worldwide, and there are almost no chiropractors in this site, and chiropractic is very inportant even if its an alternetive medicine it is important cuase it can cure many things like paralisis, blindness and many other things. Tell me what you think in my talk. Pedro thy master (talk) 12:59, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Barbaro hoaxer appears to be back[edit]
It looks like they are back, see Wikipedia:Sockpuppet investigations/Mctrain. I suspect there are additional hidden socks considering they have used 2 different variable IPs before. Edward321 (talk) 23:07, 18 July 2009 (UTC)
Requesting comment on image deletion[edit]
Hi ESkog—could you take a look at Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2009_June_25#File:Sasol_Secunda.jpg? Since you nominated the image for deletion, it would be great if you could take a look at the comment there to help make the closer's decision easier. Thanks! –Drilnoth (T • C • L) 02:29, 20 July 2009 (UTC)
Image[edit]
I was just about to get to that! It's fixed.Captain Virtue (talk)
Deletion suggestion for images 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s[edit]
Oppose
- Keep these images, they are using free or fair-use links, and are in no way being used for profit or being claimed as ownership by anyone. These images are strictly for use in the 1940s, 1950s, 1960s, 1970s articles, as educational and encyclopedic in purpose. ZenCopain (talk) 15:40, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
| “ | I, in no way, am claiming or specifically stating that these images are legally held by copyright by myself, or others. These images have no copyright whatsoever, and are within public domain. I am not, neither are other persons, using these images for profit or monetary gain, these images are not for monetary use. These images were compiled entirely by myself, and are released in public domain by my consent, and the images within these montage images, are in no way used for profit, monetary gain or purposes. These images within the images, and the entire images themselfs, strictly free use and public domain, and is for the purpose of education. The smaller images within the image are only within the fair use rationale, or in public domain, as stated in the description. | ” |
| — ZenCopain (talk) 04:10, 12 July 2009 (UTC) | ||
- All these images inside the montage images came from Wikipedia.
1980s[edit]
File:1980s decade portrait.png That image has already been cleared. —Preceding unsigned comment added by ZenCopain (talk • contribs) 16:11, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Regarding the Image for Balzac (Band)[edit]
Hi, you have deleted the image I put for Balzac (band). Is there anyway Wikipedia would let me use this image? The author already gave me permission and she stated that she doesn't really care much for the copyright. Is just a photo she took during a live event, what kind of copyright is that? hope you can help me --Blodnatt13 (talk) 15:52, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
HENRY RAEBURN DOBSON[edit]
Dear Sir, I have no time at all to go and look if and when a photo tag was added or not. I have added all tags necessary for the copyright isuue. All photographs are mine, shot by me or my family and belong to ME. So, there should be no issue. Please do restore them, as I don't know how. Tx Dr.Eric.Cabris (talk) 16:55, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Hi There, thanks for your answer, but this takes too long for me and I have not the time, nor the interest to go through all this trouble for some pictures. I will delete them myself. Best regards Dr.Eric.Cabris (talk) 17:46, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
So, pictures are deleted. Researchers will have to make their way to consult my documents in the National Portrait Gallery in London. Best wishes. Dr.Eric.Cabris (talk) 17:55, 21 July 2009 (UTC)
Brandon Lemuel[edit]
I have improved the page tell me what you think. --pedro thy master (talk) 19:44, 22 June 2009 (UTC)
- The author of this and other attempts to misuse Wikipedia for commercial promotion of living chiropractors needs another long block, possibly an indef one, considering he's already used sockpuppets to further his agenda. Brangifer (talk) 03:11, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
Lorenda Starfet, Brad Mays photos.[edit]
I have never intentionally violated copyright. I have, however, made errors in procedure. The photographs now in question are all the personal property of the subject, Brad Mays, who has no issues with their use, here and/or elsewhere. Sorry to be needy, but could you advise on a specific procedure for uploading photos? I'm a bit confused and don't want to make any more errors in my work here.
Rudybowwow
Rudybowwow (talk) 06:36, 23 July 2009 (UTC)
ESkog can you atleast make this page just to see what pepole think .Pedro thy master (talk • contribs) 21:10, 26 July 2009 (UTC)
Pedro[edit]
Hi ESkog. I'd be willing to try to help with the Pedro user as well. I thought I'd talk to you first since you are more familiar with him/her than I am though. Do you think that would just be confusing to him/her if I just popped in unannounced? — Ched : ? 06:39, 28 July 2009 (UTC)
Reply[edit]
Just to let you know, I added what you asked to those images I uploaded (source, permission etc). Thanks anyway, they were my first picture uploads so I wasn't 100% on what to do. Now I know. Whoniverse93 talk? 15:11, 6 August 2009 (UTC)
Gerald Celente article[edit]
The user Laura289 is a pro-Celente partisan (who works for Trends Journal) who edits the Celente page without proper sources, doesn't follow Wikipedia policy; she has reverted my edits without explanation; do you know how to get an administrator to block her from the Celente page? Or perhaps we can get the Celente page removed entirely? Good that you noticed the copyright problem. I'm in favor of deleting the Celente page entirely -- it's a giant waste of my time, and it's being used as an advertisement for Celente. Tomwsulcer (talk) 23:45, 14 August 2009 (UTC)tomwsulcer
- Thanks, ESkog for your assistance but this is just the latest in a long string of stuff that she's pulled. It's a nuisance. I had a fairly good (well documented, practically every line referenced) rewrite of Celente a few weeks back (I spent 8 hours on it), but my version still had flaws which I know how to fix (removing a blogger reference, and toning down a line or two). I think Celente is an interesting guy, chronically gloomy, a business consultant.Tomwsulcer (talk) 00:12, 15 August 2009 (UTC)tomwsulcer
- ESkog the Celente article is back to the bogus advertising piece, riddled with rule-violations, unsourced comments. Junk like the current Celente article makes all Wikipedians look stupid. I'm a good editor, hard-working, trying to be neutral, trying to follow Wikipedia's extensive policies, but I'm getting close to giving up. Pro-Celente partisans including GwenGale, Laura289, now Celente himself (apparently) accusing me of accusing him of being a fraud (I replied in the discussion page). These people all have a partisan pro-Celente agenda. It's not worth my time to help. Stuff like this pushes me to consider quitting Wikipedia. Tomwsulcer (talk) 16:03, 16 August 2009 (UTC)tomwsulcer
Manx Steam Railway News[edit]
Thanks for your note, but I'm a bit confused how to proceed; I'm the editor of the magazine in question and secretary/director of both Isle of Man Steam Railway Supporters' Association and the Groudle Glen Railway which (I assume) is enough to have permission :) but I'm not sure how to progress it. Hope you can help Gordonastill (talk) 15:51, 18 August 2009 (UTC)
Image problems...[edit]
... continue here. SergeWoodzing (talk) 21:17, 24 August 2009 (UTC)
File:Blood-of-Angels.jpg[edit]
Please do not remove links to active deletion discussions from image description pages. This makes it so others cannot find these discussions, but does not necessarily prevent the image from being deleted. If you continue, you may be blocked from editing. I didn't remove it intentionally. Hammersoft removed the image on Aug 27 prior to end of debate, which would be Sept 4. It was then that I noticed the reason for the Afd was 'orphaned file.' Since the file was NOT orphaned to begin with it should not have been tagged for deletion in the first place. Tag was removed because it was improper, dicussion is moot. -- More policy under Album covers category: Display of an album cover must identify the subject of an article, or specifically illustrate relevant points or sections within the text and not be purely decorative. This album cover identifies the subject. It is allowed and neccessary to illustrate the topic. Ebonyskye (talk) 19:25, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
- I might also point out that this entire discussion started with an Afd on the Michelle Belanger person, not the album, an Afd which was entirely opened then populated with votes by sockpuppets of User:MarkChase. This is just fallout. Admin SilkTork recommended merging the author bio and album and had no problem with keeping the album cover. Ebonyskye (talk) 19:43, 28 August 2009 (UTC)
Greetings, Administrator ESkog. I think I'm going to need your advice, as a neutral party who has proven to be reasonable, about the recent event that is going on in DivX article. I seem to have problem deciding what is right and what is wrong.
Recently, Wikipedia article DXGM is merged into article DivX. Following the merger however, the merged contents were deleted, due to lack of sources. However, I determined that the deleted contents have been useful and there are sources for it. So, I re-added part of the material regarding DXGM and added sources along with inline citations.
However, shortly after doing this, User:J. M. undid my edits and provided a description for his action in the talk page (Talk:DivX#DXGM) the sounded both POV and (I hope it isn't wrong to say it) very rude to me. I tried to reason with him and asked for a dispute-resolution but he seems to have started an edit-war.
I do not exactly know why his behavior strikes so impertinent to me but everytime I read his messages, it takes a great deal of effort to drive away a desire to rip him apart. I'm sure something in his tone or style of writing is insolent but I can't exactly say what. On the other hand, his consistent acts of deleting the disputed contents on-sight is certainly nothing acceptable in Wikipedia.
I need help telling the difference between the right and the wrong here. Please, ESkog, advise me: How should I act?
Fleet Command (talk) 04:07, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- Thanks for the reply. I shall do what you say. I only wish he resolved to less extreme methods of dispute resolution than undoing undoing edits because "what I wrote is correct". But I trust in your reasoning. I will cease the discussion immediately. I'll try to subdue my feelings.
- P.S. By the way, isn't it better if we keep our discussions (not only this one) in a single talk page and use {{talkback}} template? Fleet Command (talk) 19:26, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
- Argh! Just look at his last message, ESkog! It makes me super-furious just to read it! He says I haven't provided any sources (I provided five sources -- is he unable to see?) He calls me vandal and he is threatening to me to "notify an administrator". It is not fair, ESkog. It's not fair! He can be far more civil than this. I will cease this discussion on my end but please ESkog, please, I implore you, for God sake, warn him about his manner; before I lose my mind and lose the last vestiges of reason in me! Fleet Command (talk) 19:50, 2 September 2009 (UTC)
Hello?[edit]
What did I do? —Preceding unsigned comment added by 82.13.17.2 (talk) 16:25, 3 September 2009 (UTC)
UPRmuseum.gif image[edit]
Hello -- our organization took that photo and we willingly uploaded it into the Wikipedia Commons. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bprade (talk • contribs) 16:03, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Great -- thanks. I changed it and I'm going to reupload it now. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Bprade (talk • contribs) 17:26, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
LOVE Images.[edit]
You deleted the LOVE images I Uploaded saying that copyright information was not added. This is not needed as I Myself made the images from scratch. They are MY images and I give wikipedia the right to use them. The Image that is currently on the page is even worse than the one i created as this was isnt an official LOVE logo either, this was made in 06 by a fan, and he definately hasn't given wikipedia permission to upload it :P HarmonicRain (talk) 20:30, 9 September 2009 (UTC)
Pic problem[edit]
The picture you had deleted was added because the Wiki Commons picture is corrupted and does not display properly in most browsers. —Preceding unsigned comment added by Glogothetis (talk • contribs) 05:50, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
User:Nima Farid Picture Problems[edit]
I deleted the map and replaced it with a public domain map: File:Blank-Map-Iran.PNG so I want you to give me more time to do this for all of them. Nima Farid (talk) 08:34, 10 September 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Powergate92Talk 04:42, 11 September 2009 (UTC)
Fair use[edit]
For some reason you keep messaging me, suggesting that images I upload are not fair use, and don't have an explanation. The explanation is included on the file. In one case you said the image was orphaned. You did this within about 30 seconds of me uploading the file, and while I was editing the page. While I appreciate your diligence, I do think you need to be a little more calm in your interventions. Thanks Bluehotel (talk) 22:32, 17 September 2009 (UTC)
PUI notification[edit]
Wikipedia:Possibly_unfree_files/2009_September_27#File:CHCH_ONTV.svg, as you were involved in this one. Black Kite 18:20, 27 September 2009 (UTC)
File:FFVIIsephirothkillsaeris.jpg[edit]
Hi, I've started a new discussion over this file at Talk:Final_Fantasy_VII#File:FFVIIsephirothkillsaeris.jpg. As a semi-recent contributor on the file, I thought you might like to join in. Best, umrguy42 22:20, 29 September 2009 (UTC)
- Could you please revert and protect the image? On Talk:Final Fantasy VII#File:FFVIIsephirothkillsaeris.jpg, there's a consensus to have the version that was originally uploaded. User:FleetCommand just keeps reverting and I don't want to engage in an edit war. Thanks. The Prince (talk) 20:58, 30 September 2009 (UTC)
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
You can remove this notice at any time by removing the {{Talkback}} or {{Tb}} template.
Use of football helmets[edit]
Permission was granted by the copyright holder to use these on the Wikipedia football pages. What is the problem? Msr iaidoka (talk) 16:48, 30 September 2009 (UTC)